It’s very important for people on the left to believe they are popular, part of the in crowd. The cool people. They really do value group think, while conservatives tend to value independence more.

When Dem voters didn’t support Obama, that was the left’s first tactic, to shun you and kick you out of your designated “group.” Poof, you were declared to be no longer black, or female, or gay, or liberal, or a feminist. You were no longer one of the cool kids, you were mocked as an oddball and cast away to the wilderness.

That is why the exaggerated crowd estimates are so important to them. That’s why pretending they will not lose bad on Tuesday is important. It’s peer pressure. They are trying to cling to this idea that they are the majority and anybody who doesn’t subscribe to their ideals is just a weirdo, an extremist. There could be only 8 lefties left in the whole darn country and they would still declare their ideals as the norm.

After they get creamed on Tuesday, we will be subjected to the usual crap about how the elections were all stolen and voters are stupid and how only they know what’s best for this country. They won’t even consider that they may have driven people away or that perhaps some of their ideas weren’t so good. Instead they’ll claim the rest of the country is stupid or immoral and simply not worthy of being in the club.

Yep, that's about the size of it. As for me, I agree with Groucho Marx--I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member. Especially one which is clearly composed of insane people. When you continue to engage in irrational behavior, repeatedly and with vigor, while being convinced that everyone else is simply 'too stupid to understand your genius?' You are not a genius--you are insane.

I both anticipate November second, and dread November third. Delusional people usually react in an extremely negative manner to being called on their madness. Keep your powder dry.

30 October 2010

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor--he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation--he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city--he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.--Cicero, 42 B.C.

The Cocktail Party members don't want actual change, though they want you to believe they do. They make a big show of making what amount to very small changes within the Republican Party, usually exchanging one weak-spined DeceptiCon for another while pretending that this will amount to a 'great conservative revolution.'

Of course, when genuine conservatives--say, Sarah Palin or the Good Witch of the Northeast, Christine O'Donnell--appear on the scene, Cocktail Partiers soil themselves and do everything they can to sabotage any chance of their election. Why? Because real conservatives believe in limited and accountable government, which is a direct threat to the people in both parties who've been tag-teaming us for most of a century now.

So, Mr. Rove...you thought you could run your mouth safely in a foreign media? All media is global now, sir. Whoever you speak to, wherever you are, your words will find their way to American ears. And, to put it mildly, we do not like what we're hearing. With each passing day, you reveal yourself as part of the problem in this country, and eventually you'll be deservedly cast out of the political scene.

Remember, she's a real conservative. How can we tell? By her complete lack of support from the Cocktail Party.

In an interview with The Hill after a town-hall event Tuesday, McClung said the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) had dismissed her chances against Grijalva.

“[The NRCC] wrote it off,” McClung said. “We have very little contact with them.”

One source close to the McClung campaign said she recently turned down offers of support from national Republicans because of the “strings attached.” The source said the NRCC had previously told McClung she was on a “political suicide mission” for entering the race against Grijalva, who was then thought to be a shoo-in for reelection.

A review of Federal Election Commission records by The Hill showed the NRCC has not yet spent any money to help McClung’s candidacy.

So, help America flip the bird to both racism and cronyism. Ruth McClung is fighting everything that's gone wrong with our great Republic, and she needs our support. Go forth and kick ass.

27 October 2010

As I read through this latest article from the inimitable Robin of Berkeley, I was at first overjoyed. Yet another person learning the truth about 'White America!!'

A black man, Benjamin lived for three months at a time in these lily-white communities: St. George, Utah; Coeur d'Alene, Idaho; and Forsyth County, Georgia. He anticipated a gauntlet of racial hate. And yet...

Benjamin's sojourn was, according to him, a whirlwind of "fun" and a "gabfest." Looking beyond race, his new neighbors welcomed him with open arms. It appears that the only risk the newcomer faced was exhaustion from so much merrymaking.

I had a big old smile on my face, until the midpoint of the article. My joy became exasperation at these words:

In the end, even with the kindness of white strangers, Benjamin joins the ranks of the agitators. His startling conclusion at the end of the book? He was treated like visiting royalty not because his white neighbors were colorblind, but because he's a "no demand" black.

In particularly twisted logic, Benjamin maintains that his white neighbors were welcoming only because he's an affable black man. This invites the question: if a nasty, demanding person of any race came to town, won't he be snubbed because no one likes nasty and demanding people?

The book degenerates into another rant against whites, another command for more conversations about race.

I couldn't believe my eyes. Seriously? Is this man so completely deluded that he can't see simple human kindness for what it is? Is Mr. Benjamin so determined to see a racist behind every White face? Is he so consumed with paranoia that he considers every non-Black smile to be a sign of contempt?

Apparently so. My exasperation became a deep sadness as I realized how damaged this poor man is, and how he has apparently given up on a large portion of the human race, simply because of their color. Dr. King would not have wanted this, nor do millions of Americans of all shades.

And now? Now I'm furious. Not at Mr. Benjamin, but at the race-baiting scum who continue to poison the minds of good people against each other. Those who have taken a message of equality and tolerance and perverted it to serve their own agenda. Those who make their living off of the concept of racism, and therefore have a vested interest in seeing that racism never ends.

That means you, NAACP.

That means you, New Black Panthers.

That means you, Jesse Jackson.

That means you, Al Sharpton.

That means you, La Raza.

That means you, Eric Holder.

That means you, President Obama.

That means all of you who shielded a Marxist behind your shrieks of "RAAAACIST!!" Who tell young Black men and women that their dreams and goals are all for naught because Whitey's going to keep them down no matter what, and that they may as well embrace the ignorance of Thug Life and get used to the ghetto. Who ghettoize new immigrants in the name of 'multiculturalism,' making assimilation out to be something shameful. Who make it their life's mission to divide people in the name of 'unity.'

26 October 2010

"Just watch the vid. Leave behind your cynicism, your snark, your malaise, and I'll spare your lives. Just watch the vid. It'll leave you smiling through the wasteland of the current regime. Just watch the vid, and there will be an end to the horror."

In Ayn Rand's most (in)famous work, Atlas Shrugged, an unlikely hero by the name of Ragnar Danneskjold explains his mission in life:

"I'm after a man whom I want to destroy. "

"What man?"

"Robin Hood. ...He was the man who robbed the rich and gave to the poor. Well, I'm the man who robs the poor and gives to the rich – or, to be exact, the man who robs the thieving poor and gives back to the productive rich." (2.7.2.93-97)

I know exactly how Mr. Danneskjold feels. While I wish him luck on his quest, I have a target of my own to take down. I've been after this punk for years, and I won't stop until justice has been done. If it's the last thing I do...

21 October 2010

I've noticed a pattern: the more transparent the lie, the more trouble the Left is in. This evidence leads me to believe that they're in so much trouble that they're not going to be allowed to leave Time-Out until sometime after the heat-death of the universe.

Liberals, please don't click the fold. Just go back to reading HuffBlow and denigrating 'teabaggers.' If you disregard this advice, tell your mom I'm not responsible for cleaning up after your head explosion.

16 October 2010

And they will continue to do so until the so-called 'majority' steps up. If 'a handful of fanatics' really have hijacked the 'real' Islam...then Muslims need to take back their religion. If you won't stand up for your faith, what will you stand for?

BELTWAY ADVENTURE

WELCOME TO ADVENTURE! WOULD YOU LIKE INSTRUCTIONS?>YESYOU ARE SOMEWHERE IN BELTWAY FOREST, WHERE SOME HAVE FOUND TREASURES OF GOLD ALTHOUGH SOME HAVE ENTERED AND NEVER BEEN SEEN AGAIN. MAGIC IS SAID TO WORK IN THE FOREST. I WILL BE YOUR EYES AND HANDS. DIRECT ME WITH SIMPLE COMMANDS.YOU ARE IN AN OVAL OFFICE. THERE IS SNOW OUTSIDE. YOU ARE BEHIND A DESK. ON DESK THERE IS A BUST OF CHURCHILL.YOU HAVE A CONGRESS.YOU HAVE A SENATE.YOU HAVE A MEDIA.YOU HAVE A TELEPROMPTER.YOU HAVE A MILITARY.YOU HAVE A BIG JET.YOU HAVE $3 TRILLION OF GOLD.YOU HAVE 82% APPROVAL HEALTH.THERE IS 7.2% UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE FOREST.YOU HAVE A RACE CARD.YOU HAVE INAUGURAL PARTY LEFTOVERS. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO?

The Progressives Oppressives have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at Christine O'Donnell. They claimed a 19 point lead, which--after the recent debate--promptly shrank to 11 points. (That's if the polls aren't skewed in favor of the Left, which is looking more and more likely.) Now, the Light Bringer His Own Self has come to campaign against her.

Does anyone remember what's happened to every single candidate Obama has stumped for? They all went down in flames. Beaten like a rented mule. Dems across the country, to this day, are still cringing at the mere thought of the Obama Death Touch.

And now, Obama has stumped for Chris Coons.

So, Ms. O'Donnell, if you'd like me to lend a hand writing your inauguration speech, I think I could squeeze it in. ;)

I've been pretty blunt about how Kevin DuJan and the rest of the HillBuzz brigade changed my life. Now, I'd like to make a dream of theirs come true, and take down another arrogant entitlement queen oathbreaker in the process. Win-win.

And yes, I signed a petition at a progressive organization. Because all of us, even the Liberals, can agree that this needs to be stopped.

One example of what this means in practice: sites like YouTube could be censored in the US. Copyright holders like Viacom often argue copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube, but under current US law, YouTube is perfectly legal as long as they take down copyrighted material when they're informed about it -- which is why Viacom lost to YouTube in court.

But if COICA passes, Viacom wouldn't even need to prove YouTube is doing anything illegal to get it shut down -- as long as they can persuade the courts that enough other people are using it for copyright infringement, the whole site could be censored.

Perhaps even more disturbing: Even if Viacom couldn't get a court to compel censorship of a YouTube or a similar site, the DOJ could put it on the second blacklist and encourage ISPs to block it even without a court order. (ISPs have ample reason to abide the will of the powerful DOJ, even if the law doesn't formally require them to do so.)

Go forth, RTWT, sign the petition, and get with the raising hell about this.

When people say "Detroit" today, it brings to mind something very different than it used to. I don't want you to think of the connotation of today. Let's take a trip back to the 50's and 60's.

Back in those days, Detroit was one of the Shining Cities of America. The Holy Land of the automobile. A hub of commerce and culture. A showcase of daring architecture and phenomenal music. A launching point to an unimaginably bright future, where anything was possible.

Think about that. Take as long as you like. Let your mind wander freely and openly. Consider all the wonderful things the Detroit of yesteryear promised America and the world. Think about all the potential it offered humanity.

Looks like Raul Grijalva is playing the race card, as if that's a surprise. Well, actually, his wife is playing the race card on his behalf. I thought Hispanic men were too macho to hide behind their wives' skirts, but I guess not, at least in this case.

This is pathetic in more ways than one. All these people have, literally, is smears and attacks. From the lies about spittle and epithets flying on Capitol Hill, to the endless screams of "RAAACIST!!" at anyone who questions the Marxist policies of The Lightbringer, they keep playing the same one-note tune over and over again. On some level, they have to know the Race Card is maxed out, but they keep saying "run it again" no matter how many times it comes up "DECLINED." They simply don't know what else to do.

Meanwhile, the Hottie Physicist continues to pull away, point by point. Google her, and her donation link comes up fifth.* If this trend continues until November 2, I'll still be smiling on New Year's Day.

When you look at the state of our Republic, you'd be forgiven for thinking it a horror movie. But maybe it's a hero picture. (Allen West would make one hell of a modern-day Indiana Jones. And he'd do his own stunts.)

For those of you who might have forgotten, Grijalva is a race-baiting jerk who called for a boycott of his own state. Yep, you read that right. This troll got all butt-hurt when Arizona decided that the federal immigration law should actually be enforced, and he promptly threw a hissy fit that got national attention. Looks like it got his constituents' attention as well, because Ruth McClung is in a statistical dead heat with the Blob That Ate Yuma.

I love this state. I don't like people harming it, and I hate racist scumbags like Raul Grijalva who put their own power-plays and grievances above America in general and Arizona in particular. So, I'm taking this race personally, as in, "IT'S ON." This is one we need to win. If you're in AZ 7, the vote is obvious. If you're not, go cough up $20 minimum into Mrs. McClung's war chest. Now. If my broke ass could do it, so can you.

It's...well, the Common Law. The concept that communities and societies have the right, to a certain extent, to determine what's acceptable and what isn't. This goes way farther back than the founding of America, even. (Yes, there was life before America. You know--the Before Time. The Long-Long-Ago.)

So, What's This Foolishness that the Wraith is bringing up now? Well, bear with me, and I will explain. The Westboro Baptist Jerks are in the news again for protesting being assholes at the funeral of one of our fallen warriors. This has led to a very volatile court battle concerning the limitations of the First Amendment. Intelligent arguments have been made on both sides, especially by Jennifer, but I believe they're all missing the point.

Wow. Sundance Cracker has now become the third recipient of the W&POAward ForExtreme Cleverness.

UPDATE 12/9/10: Due to the recent HB fiasco, I can no longer consider an ex-Buzzer post safe. Therefore, SC's original post is reposted here in its entirety.

Dear HillBuzz,

In order to WIN any contest, the first step is to know, and understand, the heart of your adversary. Not just know who they are, but to know “what they are” and what makes them tick. Know and understand them, really understand them, understand their core ideology and beliefs. When you know the emotional position the opposition carries walking into the conflict you can prepare yourself, and your position, for success.

I’ve had some truly shockingly cruel, hateful, and insensitive things said to me purely because I believe in limited government and fiscal conservatism. At times I have felt despair because “they” want me to believe my views are in the minority. The opposition knows that inherently my beliefs reflect my concern for others and they use this against me.

I believe that we should be self-reliant and personally responsible, but I also believe that when we are allowed to depend on ourselves, we are stronger, more successful, take greater pride in ourselves and our work, and are more likely to make positive contributions to society. Then we are happier people, or at least more likely to be happier.

Which brings me to my ponderings. I think fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.

This is an important distinction and so I repeat, “fear is at the core of liberalism”.

Control is a reaction to fear. I think in terms or politics and society – the fear behind liberalism is the fear that someone might withhold things (opportunities, money, whatever) from me, fear that if you live your life in a way I dislike that it might affect my life, fear that if you get that job, there will be nothing left for me. Fear that if you make tons of money, it’s means there’s less money out there for me. So these people seek control as a means of trying to create guarantees and safeguards against those circumstances they fear. (*Think about re-distributive wealth policies).

Liberals try to control the world and people to enable their comfort and happiness. Which, as we know, is an endless quest. (*Think about fear created with Global Warming alarmists). Trying to control others does nothing in the way of making oneself happy. By extension, voting in this mindset so that government can try to control others will also – shockingly – not lead to a happier, more comfortable life.

The conservative (and moderate, independent, but for the sake of expediency, the conservative), on the other hand, relies on himself to meet his own needs. And the trade off of being free to live his life as he wishes is also understanding that he has to make peace with how you live yours. By extension, aware that he wants to be able to hold onto this liberty and freedom forever, the conservative votes accordingly, so that everyone can remain free and in charge of his or her own life.

But here’s the crucial difference, I think, particularly in where misery on the left stems: The conservative does not worry, so to speak, about you. The conservative knows that you were born with the same access to self-love, self-empowerment, self-determination and self-reliance that we all were, no matter the circumstances into which you were born. (*Think about the millions of people this country has allowed to crawl up from poverty into prosperity – the conservative KNOWS this is possible.)

The conservative believes that if you want prosperity, or a good job, or a good education, you can make it happen – but you have to work hard. The conservative hopes and intends that the free markets bring you all of the affordable and positive opportunities and resources that you need. The conservative also knows that on the other side of that hard work is great reward – material and, more importantly, emotional, spiritual and mental.

The conservative understands that not only is it a waste of time to try to control you, it’s actually impossible. Humans were born to be free, and if we put a roadblock in front of you, you’ll find another way around it. So we see attempts at control as a waste of resources, energy and time at best, and at worst, creating detrimental results that serve to hinder people’s upward mobility or teach dependence. We see much more efficiency, as well as endless opportunity, in leaving you to your own devices. We want the same in return, but Obama and his progressive policies are specifically counter to this belief. Hence, at an undefinable emotional level, conservative Americans are responding with outrage to these policies.

These policies seem, and are, diametrically in opposition to our inherent values, and views of self reliance, responsibility, personal accountability, freedom, and liberty.

This is where Democrats (or progressives) mis-view Republicans (or conservatives) as heartless. But really, the conservative believes that there is one, and one path only, to sustainable success and independence, and that is self-empowerment.

All other avenues such as welfare, affirmative action, housing loans you can’t actually afford – ultimately risk doing a disservice to people as they teach dependence on special circumstances, the government, or arbitrary assistance (that can disappear tomorrow); and the real danger – they will ALWAYS backfire, and leave the recipient in equally or more dire circumstances. Any false improvement will always expire. Our current economic malaise is a specific outcome of following this approach, with the best of intentions, too far.
The conservative believes in abundance. The liberal believes in scarcity.

The conservative believes man is born free and will be who he is, no matter what arbitrary limitations or rules are put on him. The liberal believes man is perfectible, and by extension, believes a society at large is perfectible, and command and control is justified in the quest to a “perfect” utopian society. (Sounds familiar!)

The conservative tends to be more faithful –and not necessarily in God, but in the ability of the individual to find great strength in himself (or from his God) to get what he needs and to be successful. Therefore the conservative has an outlet for his fear and disappointment – trust and faith in something bigger. The liberal believes the system must be perfected in order to enable success. Therefore disappointment is channeled as anger and blame at the system. Voids are left to be filled by faith in the government, which they surely then want to come in and “fix” things.

And therein lies the roots of love and fear respectively. For the conservative, when life presents great struggles, he knows he has the power to surmount them. Happiness stems from internal strength and perseverance. For the liberal, when life presents great struggles, the system failed, therefore they were at the mercy of a faulty system, and they believe that only when the system is fixed can their life improve. Happiness is built on systemic contingencies, which they will then seek to control or expect someone else to.
One blames himself. The other blames anyone and everyone but himself.

And there it is. There’s where the hatred comes from. The liberal ideology causes that person to cast anger at the world when things go wrong or appear “unfair.” He constantly chooses only to see the “injustices” – and that makes for a very miserable, mean, blame-casting existence.

One last point: Charity

In my conservative community growing up, we were always taught that you give when people are in need – make donations to the Red Cross when there’s an earthquake, donate to charity when you can afford it, etc. Even if it’s just $50 here and there – it’s the right thing to do. Conservatives see this as the responsibility that comes with gaining from the capitalistic system; if you happen to benefit greatly from the system, it’s your duty to give back.

The liberal, on the other hand, does not seem to share this same viewpoint, at least not in my experience. I think this is linked to believing in scarcity, and that your dollar comes at the cost of mine. So it seems that liberals, on some level of consciousness, feel guilty about not being voluntarily charitable. Therefore, to write off their guilt, they outsource their “generosity” to the government by voting for wealth re distributive policies. Thus, the liberal cheats himself of the joy and addictiveness of direct generosity. (Not to mention re-distributive policies ALWAYS end up disempowering those who they’re meant to help.)

In short: Yes, I do think liberals are dangerous to our republic. Because their very ideology directs their thinking in a very angry, negative way. This is what drives their actions, this is what drives their position. It is all based upon fear and an inherent lack of faith.

This is why their attacks are so vicious and filled with hate. This is the nature of our opposition. This is the fundamental ideological separation between “them” and “us”. It is imperative each of us understand this central distinction. We are at a point of critical mass, the conflict is right here right now. We have to face it head on, without compromise, and provide no quarter. We have to set down our inherent compassion and fight, really fight.

We are not just trying to win an election, we are trying to avoid a collision of Titanic proportions that will sink our nation and forever alter the course of our future. We carry this into the field of conflict not because of self interest, but because our children, our grandchildren, heck every generation needs to be able to experience the joy of freedom. We must continue to insure that Life – Liberty – and the free Pursuit of Happiness is available to every American.

03 October 2010

Congresscritters, you would do well to put down your martinis and watch this.

(H/t Sundance Cracker @ HillBuzz)

UPDATE: 2-4-1!

Sundance Cracker is in rare form today. This comment deserves a repost in its entirety:

Yep, I watched it, but I had to walk out and hit tennis balls when Chris Wallace asked Paul the question: "How do you pay for extending Bush Tax Cuts when CBO forecasts the cost to be $4 trillion over 10 years, it’s impossible"??

"W"hiskey – "T"ango – "F"oxtrot!

This is where EVEN conservatives supporters are Stoopid, framing a question from a position that reductions in spending are impossible. Aaarrgh.

First off. It’s OUR money. OURS. Not the governments. So if we say the government gets less, then yes -you flippin idiots- they are gonna have to spend less and reduce size. The $4 trillion reduction in government revenue is over 10 years. Currently the government receives about $4 trillion a year, or $40 trillion over the same period you are questioning. So, current tax rates being extended means you would have to reduce spending by 10% to retain deficit at current status.

This is possible. Easily possible. REDUCE SPENDING. Start by eliminating the 16,000 IRS agents you plan on hiring. Then reduce the budget of EVERY federal department by 10%. DOWNSIZE the public sector the same way the private sector has downsized for 5+ years.

Quit, just quit, repeating the meme the federal government has no ability to reduce size vis-a-vi-spending. AND quit using the word(s) "non-discretionary", there is no such thing. It is all "discretionary". It is up to us, yes US, to determine how much you can spend. If we say NO then we mean NO and you just gotta deal with it. We are a constitutional republic for a reason, the voices of We The People decide how you do, when you do, and what you do, with OUR money.

If we say you get less. THEN YOU GET LESS, and you figure out how to operate with less. Shut stuff down, eliminate bureocracy, get efficient, get productive, get smaller. Get it!

It frustrates me that Rand Paul, or any other fiscally prudent candidate for that matter, just fluffs over the entire SPENDING issue.

Yep, that's right. Contrary to your beliefs, statists...it's our damn money. You can just take what we give you and like it...or you just might not like what we give you.

So, over 400 leftist organizations with lots of money and coercive ability, decided to try to eclipse the massive turnout of the 8/28 Restore Honor Rally. They called their little event A Bunch Of Communists Whining Together or something, I wasn't really paying attention. They spent a not-insignificant amount of time, money and effort attempting to boost attendance, whereas the 8/28'ers made the decision and effort to attend out of their own mind and their own pocket.

So, how'd the 10/2/10 Rally do?

Yep, they really showed us, didn't they? Obviously, we're a bunch of 'radicals' and 'extremists,' while they represent mainstream America. At least, that's what goes through the lukewarm tapioca pudding that passes for their minds.

02 October 2010

A peek at the linked article will show the viewpoints of people who think this is a terrible idea, and those who think it's a good thing. I lean toward the latter view.

Look, you don't have to like Family Guy. I really kinda don't. While McFarlane used to be edgy and only mildly Leftist, now he's seriously Leftist and just over-the-top for the sake of it. And his tangents go on waaaay too long. But he's on pretty good terms with Rush. There's no animosity there. And this may very well help the conservative movement.

Folks, it's like this--we can by turns ignore and scream at the Left. We can close our eyes and ears and avoid them like the plague, convinced of our own righteousness. And, if these are the tactics we continue to use, how many Leftists will open their eyes and step over to our side? Exactly none. I know.

I used to be a left-leaning libertarian, but now I've turned pretty hard right. This wasn't due to people trying to shove their opinion down my throat; that simply made me all the more determined not to listen to them. My change of perspective was caused by people on the Right being kind, calm, rational and yes...even having a sense of humor.

Mr. Limbaugh has been portrayed as the Leftist equivalent of Beelzebub for decades, now. Therefore, his appearance on Family Guy can really only help our side. Think of how many Lefties will catch the credits and be absolutely shocked. "Dude!! NO WAY!! That really was Rush Limbaugh!! No, for real! Rewind it and I'll show you...!" And then what are they supposed to think? That overly-serious, dour, humorless, stuffed-shirt Right Wing Extremist, the eeeeeeeeeeevil Rush Limbaugh, is cool enough to appear on one of the Left's most popular shows! This will cause confusion. Then curiosity. And then at least a few of them will want to see what this Rush dude is about, 'cause this sure doesn't sound like the guy Mr. Soros told them about in class.

Don't you think this is a better way to win hearts and minds than condemnation and closed-mindedness?

Oh, just a happy little save-the-planet commercial that's been making the rounds on teh intartubez. The video and commentary are below the fold, but before you click, hear my words of warning:

What is seen, cannot be unseen. This video is EXTREMELY disturbing, not only due to its content, but what it says about the evil, evil mindset of those who thought that this was actually a good idea. The upshot is that innocent people explode in a very graphic manner, including schoolkids.